Howard Lake-Waverly Herald, Jan. 14, 2002

Water tower squabble resurfaces

The water tower squabble with Wright County was tabled
again at the Howard Lake City Council meeting Tuesday.

The new Howard Lake city water tower stands atop land that
is owned by the county.

The county recently attempted to secure signatures from
the Howard Lake council of a contract that included free use of water for
the Wright County Fairgrounds.

It was noted that resolutions were passed by both the city
and county in 1994 to allow five years of free water use for the county.
This expired in 2000, City Administrator Doug Borglund said.

These resolutions are different than the unsigned contract
being circulated by the county recently as well as the agreement that was
passed in resolution by either entity, Borglund said. The resolutions are
not a binding agreement, he added.

"There was definitely no commitment made to give them
free water," Mayor Gerry Smith said.

Smith told fair board members at a previous joint meeting
that the city would negotiate with the county.

The council will be weighing four options:

1) To rent the property from the county.

2) Give the county free water or allow a cap of 185,000,
which is what the county regularly uses during the fair. The county has
offered to pay for more of the water if it goes beyond this.

3) To buy the property from the county.

4) To condemn the property and declare eminent domain proceedings,
which would mean the city would end up owning it anyway.

The county mentioned insurance, since the property is not
insured, although the water tower itself is insured by the city.

The city needs an easement from the county before it can
insure the land.

The subject was tabled to decide future action.

Is Howard Lake City Hall structure sound?

The council also discussed potential problems with the
structural integrity of the historic city hall building.

Conflicting engineering reports caused council members
to wonder what state the building was in.

The most recent report came from Barr Engineering, which
noted the crack at the building's foundation on the northeast corner.

The weakness "could at some point lead to catastrophic
failure," Barr reported. The crack is situated among the building's
100-year-old foundation, made with field stone and mortar, Borglund said.

The crack was fairly small before construction started,
Barr reported, but became much worse after construction "due to the
inadequate design of the retrofitted basement door." The report also
indicated that there was very little vibration from the Highway 12 project
which could have caused the crack to become so much worse.

This is contrary to reports from the city's engineer firm
Hay Dobbs.

Several months before construction, the city's engineering
firm Hay Dobbs, gave the building a clean bill of health.

"Hay Dobbs said the building was in excellent shape,"
Smith said. Nearly all of the councilors expressed doubt that the crack
was from anything other than construction, since the timing appeared to
fit the Highway 12 project perfectly.